Tuesday, 7 June 2011

The real agenda behind the Libya attack

A few weeks ago I posted a genuine question which provided some great feedback. Now I have another: I'm genuinely unsure of the reasons behind the attack on Libya.

There are a number of strange features about this For a start, Ghaddafy had come in form the cold and was a really really good boy compared to long ago Then there was the speed with which the decision were made, the widespread support even from the Arab League and African Union, and the enthusiastic support of France and Italy, who normally vigorously oppose such initiatives. And what about establishment of the dreaded central bank in Benghazi with such unseemly haste.

Humanitarian: The impulse is to laughingly dismiss this out of hand. But there might be some truth in it. It seems that Samantha Power (who is Irish, by the way) was the main driver for the attack. She is fixated by the failure of the Western powers to prevent the Rwanda massacre. However, American allies in Bahrain and Yemen have been mowing down protestors in even greater numbers.

Western oil companies: The very unfavourable terms given by Ghaddafy to western oil companies.

Dollar as a reserve currency: Ghaddafy was going to help replace the dollar as the trading currency for oil, thereby accelerating America’s decline.

Re-conquer Africa: A ‘spearhead attack’ by the West to re-conquer Africa and forestall the Chinese threat.

Dependency and looting: Render Libya dependent on the IMF and other globalist bodies, which would surely result in privatising the country’s assets, a la Russia, with lots and lots of money to be made by the same people.

Democratic Party politics: Hillary wants to drag Obama into another land war, thereby giving her a chance for the next Democratic nomination as Barry crashes and burns.

138 comments:

Franz
said...

Ghaddafy was just a convenient scapegoat when Sarcozy's, Cameron's and Obama's handlers needed one. Remember that all the uprisings in North Africa began with high food prices. Some people were starting to see a connection between burgeoning costs to nourish oneself and western central banks' money printing, so a pawn had to be blown up in spectacular fashion.

Mr Ghadaffy was that pawn. Even though - as Mr Nigel Farage points out in the following video - he was best good friends with some of Europe's high and mighty just months before the war.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yMYwkeq7w04

Also, Mr Ghaddafy had been seriously messing with the program, for which reason he had a target painted on his back. His greatest sins were engaging in foolishness such as: Stockpiling gold (170 tons of it), buying up agricultural land in neighbouring countries, building dams to irrigate it, doing business with the Chinese and worst of all: Slowing the flood of immigrants across the Mediterranean to a trickle.

If he promises to stop all that nonsense, he has a good chance to be our best good friend once more (although I somehow doubt that he cherishes that idea). In that case, Oceania's war effort will have always focused on East Asia. Rumors of past attacks on our gallant ally Lybia will be punished by a swift visit to room 101.

As with Peter a combination of all factors and maybe a little bit of Goldman Sachs losing a couple of Billion which would be easier for them to get paid by having him removed by the taxpayer paid militaries of a couple of countries rather than Goldamn doing without their bonuses?

Having fought in Afghan I think the point is chaos ..I honestly believe the powers that be are trying to start a conflict on a massive scale, which they will profit from in many ways just as they did after WWII. They operate through international treaties and bodies. They are stateless , psychopathic and seem to believe they are the masters of history.

I think that that the west has wounded a badger. I will not call Gaddaffi a tiger. But he is a barking mad honey badger -- and not to be underestimated.

Because of this he has the capacity to do them a truly enormous amount of actual harm. When I say "the West" I do not mean us ... you and me necessarily, But the vipers who have been so active over the last century.

Consider this; Osama Bin Laden, merely as a symbol, theoretically changed the west. And he had no influence at all ... he was a ghost, a construct -- compared to Gaddaffi who (right now) is very, very real.

If Gaddaffi gets out of this, and If he has managed to retain any wealth, influence and materiel at all, he will become a saw-toothed bayonet in the side of those who betrayed him.

He is not sane, he knows who they are and where they live because he has dealt with them, and I will bet a pound to a pinch of poodle poo that he still has lots of connections with lots of the world's ultimate crazies.

These are the guys who are nutty enough to fire an RPG into the royal Daimler just to show willing.

If the "west" do not destroy him, they will spend the years ahead living like the family who know that there is a wounded viper in the cellar ... somewhere.

As far as Savant's list of reasons for all this fooferaw, I would concur with every one except the humanitarian one.

Oh, and just because I am a difficult bugger, you will have noticed that the scandal of the BATF supplying assault rifles to Mexican drug runners as well as the fake Obama birth certificate have fallen clean off the charts.

Secondly, despite the significant desertion of Mexican soldiers who likely took thier M16 rifles with them (150,000 soldiers deserted in the past 6 years out of a force of 183,700 active personal) the Mexicans have kept very quite about M16 rifles being confiscated. I only managed to find evidence of three M16 rifles captured in the past 12 months. This does not make sense considering the vast quantity of these arms almost certainty exist in the hands of Mexican criminals.

Consider some of the following statistics:Only nineteen percent of Pakistanis have a negative view of Al Qaeda and by default the Taliban, whilst seventy-five percent wish to see Sharia law implemented. British-born Muslims make an estimated four hundred thousand trips a year to Pakistan, where as many as thirty threats against Britain are being monitored at any given time.

Thirty-three percent of Muslim students in Britain think killing in the name of Islam is permissible. Only thirty-seven percent oppose the introduction of Sharia law and only twenty-five percent oppose the creation of a worldwide Muslim caliphate.

MI5 believe there are up to four thousand potential terrorists and thirteen thousand Al Qaeda sympathisers living in Britain.

The CIA devotes an astonishing forty percent of their anti-terrorist homeland security operations against suspects not in Afghanistan or Waziristan, but in Britain itself — a country described by one CIA operative as “a swamp of Jihadis.”

Barack Obama’s counter-terrorist advisor Bruce Riedel recently stated: “The British Pakistani community is recognised as probably Al Qaeda’s best mechanism for launching an attack against North America.”

Please note ... these guys are already in the UK. No awkward sneaking past customs and immigration for them. So ... what are the chances that they can -- and already have -- smuggled in weapons of war?

Secondly Gaddaffi spent decades in the 60's, 70's and 80's making friends with -- and bankrolling -- crazies all around the world. RAF, The Japanese weirdoes ...

He just has to make a few promises, call in a few favours and as a friend of mine used to say:- "Bob's your uncle, Fannie's your aunt and Dick's your best friend."

Hey. If I were him, I'd do it.

And on that cheerful note ...

Uncle Nasty

PS. BTW, It appears that Gaddaffi funded even more left wing crazies quite recently ... Like the froggie dwarf.

Perhaps it would have been better for the West if we just ignored what was happening in Libya and had let Gadaffi swiftly mop all resistance and re-impose his rule.My point is that we are seeing massive and serious unrest all over the Arab world.Syria is in a state of crisis, as is Yemen and the Saudis must be seriously worried that the contagion will strike them next.With oil north of $120 per barrel, the spread of unrest can only damage the west.Snuffing out revolutionaries in Libya would have signalled to many wannabes (as opposed to Wahabees), that their efforts would be vain and foolhardy.

As I see it, the support for the attack on Libya came from people/industries motivated out of greed, namely:

1.) Armaments industry gets richer the more wars you have.

2.) The EU has a lot of bureaucrats that get rich handling Third World refugees/immigrants fleeing to Europe, so obviously they want endless numbers of such refugees. With Gadhafy--and his restrictions on allowing African immigration to Europe--out of the way, the floodgates are opening again, as you can see from the thousands of migrants on Lampedusa island. Food, transportation, housing, job training, etc. easily provides jobs for thousands of EU bureaucrats.

3.) TV news channels get higher ratings with more wars, and hence they can charge advertisers more, so they tend to be hawkish.

U.S. foreign policy, since the beginnings of the last century, has been extremely effective in achieving its true goals. People fail to grasp this because they seem bent on evaluating this policy relative to the purposes that it logically should be serving—to wit, the best interests of America and its people—instead of relative to the purposes that it actually is serving...

The key to understanding these policies rests in a simple, logical exercise. Answer the question:

What is an existential threat to a nation-state?...

The nation-state (or coalitions thereof) is the existential enemy of the nation-state.

Terrorism is not only not an enemy of the nation-state, it can be a useful tool in solidifying support for the nation-state, when said state promotes itself and its aggrandizement of power as the necessary means of effectively protecting them from terror. Terrorists can never be an existential threat to an external nation-state, because they cannot defeat a modern, standing army, occupy another country, and install themselves as its rulers. The entire concept is preposterous.

But wait a minute, I hear you saying...Afghanistan (or Iraq, or Libya, or whatever the sandbox of the month happens to be) couldn't possibly be an existential threat to the U.S. of A.!...

Libya was rather small potatoes, methinks—but the Powers That Be are playing for all the marbles here, and they figured they could make it happen (and they have, haven't they?)...

In closing, the foreign policy goals of the United States have been remarkably successful at achieving their objectives.

Today, every nation-state within Israel's sphere of interest that existed at the turn of the century is either in the hands of a monarchical kleptocracy in bed with Western powers, in a total state of disarray, or currently under attack from either external military forces or “spontaneous” internal rebellion. (As an aside, note how we have not stopped our kleptocratic friends in Yemen, Saudi Arabia, and Bahrain from dealing brutally with their uprisings.)

There are, however, at least two partial failures that should be mentioned: I am quite sure that it was intended and expected to use American outrage after 9/11 to not only drive the U.S. into the conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq, but also against Iran, too. I also believe that propaganda and media sentiment was intended to completely blur or eliminate the lines separating Al Qaeda and other anti-Western nasties, on the one hand, and Palestinian “terrrrrrists,” on the other, in the mind of Westerners—to the extent that we would give Israel a free hand in brutalizing the Palestinians and taking whatever scraps of land and infrastructure these poor souls are still able to eke out an existence on. We haven't been prodded into attacking Iran—yet. And once in a while, some quiet peeps from the corner will emerge, forcing the fulminating Israelis to moderate their land-grabbing...or at least pretend to, once in a while. At least they haven't started mechanized killing of the Palestinians—yet.

The fact that these policies are exhausting the resources of the United States is not relevant to the major actors.

Obamunist Attempt to Sabotage Second Amendment Continues to Cause Havoc

In which we learn:-

What possible motive could the Obama Misadministration have for "walking" American guns into Mexico? The answer is obvious — to attack the Second Amendment by getting people killed with them:Whistleblower ATF agents have made it clear as to the motive for the illegal scheme that has created an 'international incident' between the U.S. Government and the Government of Mexico.

The agents themselves are adamant that their supervisors planned the scheme in order to pad statistics that would show U.S. guns are fueling the drug cartels, that the U.S. has a major problem with lax gun laws, and then provide an impetus for the Obama Administration and other gun control advocates to hype up anti-gun hysteria — all in support of another round of restrictive gun laws.

But there is a much more sinister motive at play.Mike Vanderboegh, who, along with David Codrea, first broke the story of this sordid scheme, reports today that the media is willing to roll out any theory as plausible, except for the one the agents themselves say is the correct one. In fact, one writer referred to the agents' story as a 'tin foil hat' theory.

Here in France the view is that Sarkozy rushed in for domestic and foreign policy reasons.

During the Tunisian uprising the then French foreign minister, Michèle Alliot-Marie, made a disastrous speech to the French Assembly. She suggested to stunned deputies that France should provide equipment and training to the government of Ben Ali to help them contain the riots "in a humaine way". It further emerged that she had accepted hospitality in her personal life from the Ben Ali family.

This scandal was extremely damaging to Sarkozy, both domestically and amongst the rising forces demanding change in Arab countries. Sarkozy's chances of being re-elected next year took a serious blow.

It was Sarkozy and his new foreign minister, the highly competent Alan Juppé, who engineered the intervention in Lybia to restore the standing of Sarkozy and of France. This is why the first strikes and the biggest military contribution came from France.

It was a daring and brilliant move. The success was immediate: images of young Libyians waving the French flag and chanting approving of Sarkozy had a big impact both domestically and in Arab countries.

Don't underestimate the fact that they foolishly thought it would be EASY, a painless victory -- and thus that they would get the glory of victory without any effort or sacrifice. Hence all the talk of "days not weeks" etc.

Exactly the same as with Iraq and Cheney's famous "cakewalk" comment. In both Iraq and Libya the American leadership seems sincerely to have believed that it was just a matter of another Grenada- or Panama-type operation.

Ghaddafy had a bilateral deal with Berlusconi of Italy to prevent black Africans from making the crossing to Lampedusa. Berlusconi gave him cash (I believe the € figure was in the billions) and didn't ask how Ghadaffy kept his side of the bargain. It quickly turned out that Ghaddafy did so by means of barbed wire and the occasional well aimed burst from his troops' AKs.

Said deal got powerful interests within the EU administration hopping mad. Remember, the EU wants more cultural enrichment from the heart of darkness. It recently even built a job centre in Mali (!) to tap into the huge local recruiting pool of doctors (!!) and engineers (!!!) that it is convinced is there.http://www.theafronews.eu/europe_world_news-eu_opens_job_centre_in_africa_110.html

In Germany there is a powerful minority within the political class that wants to take part in the hit job on Ghadday. Their reason for being mad at him is precisely his treatment of "immigrants" in years past. Luckily our resident Benedict Arnold appreciation society has not yet been able to organize the necessary pro-war parliamentary majorities.

I have said it before: For the last 15 years or so, Ghaddafy had been a well behaved and loyal neighbour to white Europeans. Now however, we have a wounded, poisonous and mad-as-hell serpent on that side of the Mediterranean. No good can come of it.

P.S. Savant, if you want to adorn this post with some artwork, there is a fabulous image by David Dees that would fit right in. Mr Dees is an activist artist who wants to see his art spread, so putting him in here would be a favor rather than an act of IP theft. Here is the link:

Gaddafi could leave tomorrow and we wouldn't be ready ... Western moves to free up billions of dollars in frozen ... Libya has plenty of money in our accounts. But we need to ...www.msnbc.msn.com/id/43316054/ns/business - Cached

Uncle Nasty: I'm not saying that Gadaffi and/or Libya does not have lots and lots of money in First World banks. That's a given. What I'm saying is that it's simply ridiculous to suggest that if he goes down the western bankers will simply run off with the cash. They're bad, very bad, but they would not and could not do that.

With the US manufacturing base destroyed and sent to China, and with the contents of Fort Knox now residing in Jerusalem, thanks to all those Israeli-Amercicans, the only thing holding up the dollar is it's reserve currency status.

Every time oil is bought and sold, currency must be converted to US dollars, providing a massive demand for the currency that would otherwise lose a large amount of it's value.

Anyone, I mean anyone, including the European Union, who suggests using any other currency than the $ to purchase oil will be attacked, one way or another, whether by the promotion of mass Muslim or African immigration, or just dropping bombs.

Sorry, almost forgot to add, the more chaos and war you can create, the higher the price of oil, and thus the more dollars you must purchase to buy energy and keep the dollar reasonably supported whilst you run the printing presses. If it wasn't for that, the $ would lose 99% of it's value. Weimar Republic again, and guess who'll get the blame?

... What I'm saying is that it's simply ridiculous to suggest that if he goes down the western bankers will simply run off with the cash. They're bad, very bad, but they would not and could not do that.

Come to think of it, the necessity of maintaining the $ a the World Reserve currency whilst simultaneously running the printing presses on full steam, would necessitate wars against oil producing countries, and thus the justification of such wars - 911

Franz: I've read your various theories. i don't mean this in any negative sense whatsoever, but have you any evidence? Most of the factors you cite could just as easily be seen as acting as a deterrant to European hostility. As the post heading said, a genuine question!

As concerns Mr Ghaddafy's belief in the value of gold, agricultural lands and business contacts in the Far East... that is well documented as well.

All this shows that Mr Ghaddafy is profoundly different from other Islamic despots. He craves REAL, touchable value and wants no part of the paper money game.

This leads me to believe that Mr Ghaddafy has been singled out for some harsh treatment by powerful interests in Europe and the USA.

Surely there is no humanitarian angle to all this. If that was so, Nato would need to bomb not only Lybia but also Syria and Bahrain, the regimes of which also engage in wholesale slaughter of their own citizens.

Think about it: Why kill Ghaddafy and not Assad of Syria? Why not King Hamad bin Isa Al Khalifa of Bahrain?

Because the latter don't mess with the program. Because they waste their respective nations' wealth on dollars and its derivatives, allowing banks to collect fees in the process. Because they are utterly unthreatening mouses, while Ghaddafy is quite the other thing. Remember: The guy overthrew a monarchy and made himself dictator for life before he celebrated his 30th birthday.

Would my thoughts on Lybia stand up as FACT in a court of law? Of course not.

But the way one despot is singled out while all others are allowed to merrily plunder, torture and kill their subjects, leads me to define in what way Mr Ghaddafy is different from the rest of them.

The most glaring differences between him and all the others happen to be...

b) ...his willingness to rent out his armed forces in order to keep the black masses from invading southern Europe.

I hope this explains my thought process. It may be utterly flawed of course. After all, I am following the discussions on the Savant's site in order to expose myself to different ideas and opinions and - if need be - correct my own line of thinking.

I don't know, I think if we miss this opportunity to tip Gaddafi over we'd regret it - how long will it be till the next chance comes along? He's got a like-minded son. I don't think we /like/ dictators, they're just there, and, when else will the population be fired up and ready to fight? Too, one more major Arab country to put peer pressure on the rest, make a new normal.

I don't know, I think if we miss this opportunity to tip Gaddafi over we'd regret it - how long will it be till the next chance comes along?

As the old saying goes, be careful what you wish for. your country, wherever it may be, may decide to slip the Zionist yoke, and you may just wake up one fine morning with NATO gunships hovering over your back yard.

Think it's impossible? I am sure the citizens of Romania thought the same thing back in 1993. I know we south Africans did in 1990.

Just like Iraq... We decide the we want a new regime, the Times will help with the cover story. We likely have been supporting the rebels from the start. When Ghaddafi fights the armed insurrection, he's "killing his own people." (Gasp!) Thanks to R2P we have the right to overthrow wherever our intelligence agencies can create instability! Neocolonialism and Imperialism R' Us.

Here's a likely explanation, or part explanation: In early 2008, Libya’s sovereign-wealth fund gave $1.3 billion to Goldman Sachs Group to sink into a currency bet and other complicated trades. The investments lost 98% of their value, internal Goldman documents show.

The head of the fund was “like a raging bull,” when he met with GS, cursing and threatening Mr. Kabbaj and another Goldman employee. Goldman arranged for security to protect the employees until they left Libya the next day, according to people familiar with the matter.

The UDA spent a week explaining Irish politics to the confused Libyans (allegedly Gaddafi thought the UWC strike was an anti-imperialist general strike against the British), no doubt providing an alternative narrative to that given to the dictator by Joe Cahill a few years before.

...the British NF also tried to receive Libyan money during the late 1980ies but only received 5.000 copies of Gaddafi’s Green Book.

Second commentor is German and that is how 5 000 or 5,000 is written there.

At the same time the Occidentals support the Rebels (also called Freedom fighters, or Democracy lovers)in these arab countries, calling for UN indignation and intervention each time the crowd demonstrates its 'legitimate' anger against the violent totalitarian regime, the US is perfectioning its own 'crowd-managment' weapons of mass control.Sound shock blasters, Microwave canons, Cell phone tracking, Artificial Intelligence-based Internet robots able to filter trillions of emails...That's for the high tech. So this raises the question: would a crowd of thousands of angry US citizens, despite being NON-autorized by the US government, be able to organize and demonstrate in Washinton DC, in a crucial day, let's say election day? Chances are that the US 'government' would behave exactly like the Syrian government.But beside the high tech, the most efficient weapon of crowd control in the US arsernal is Diversity. The Elite Rulers promoted Diversity to eliminate any chances any form of Nationalism will ever come back in any western country. This weapon simply guaranties the Elite will stay in control.That's the most important difference with the arabs 'fredom-fighters'. Where diversity is absent, like in Syria, lybia etc. a popular rising against a totalitarian regime is always possible. These arab demonstrations are nothing else than a form of arab nationalism. But in WashingtonDC... an angry White mob would be happily whipped out by a Black police. In Los Angeles, Hispanics would be equally delighted to fry white and/or black brains with some fancy microwave guns.

Once I told a young Hispanic-white metis that it didn't matter anymore if he voted Donkey or Elephant. He agreed, but then I told him that ethnic mixity and miscgenetion is also a tool of totalitarian power, as the mestis usually has no strong allegeance or identity to any side. The Metis should only care about the only thing what matter in the US: his own money. The Metis is the ultimate Individualist, the Anti-Nationalist by essence, the best protection for a totalitarian Elite.

Today all of the big MSM news sites feature the "story" of how Ghaddafy personally spoon fed viagra to his sex-crazed mercenearies in order to make sure that no Lybian woman has to go unraped.

It is as if O'Brien in the ministry of truth clapped his hands and all his minions sprang into action.

If any of these news organizations had real-in-the-flesh correspondents down there, doing their own inquiries in their own time, the chance of this item hitting the wires in all the big outlets !simultaneously! would be somewhere in the vicinity of 0,00000000000001%.

Raymond Chandler once wrote (and I paraphrase) that only lies appear orderly and streamlined. The truth tends to be messy, with ragged edges formed by reality.

Although coming from an author of fiction, this little observation prooves invaluable when one is confronted by the latest "narratives", courtesy of the MSM.

Once again, we have the raped nuns, the babies for bayonet practise and the hebrew soap on a rope. (Get your whites whiter and your colours brighter!!!) or as the truth would have it -- get your whites darker and your colours running the show.

I've been dabbling in the mid 90's poodlebang in Yugoslavia, since they found Ratko Mladic, the Bosnian Serb general wanted for alleged war crimes committed during the 1992-95 Bosnian conflict.

And thought ... why him? Why now?

What triggered this? Some muslim bint wailing and caterwauling on TV about war crimes and stating that a pregnant muslim woman (is there any other kind?) was killed by -- get this -- a Christian soldier "thrusting his hand into her and ripping out her unborn child ..."

All this while the CNN/ABC/BBC/Fox News drone was nodding glassy-eyed ...

More anti-Christian atrocity theatre.by the time the MSM are done, Mladic will face charges of eating fluffy bunnies while sodomising little girl's hamsters. Oh yes, and laughing maniacally and smoking cigarettes while he does it. Oh, and contributing to climate change.

I confess I was not aware of the "covert" operation in Yemen, but this is shocking news. We're involved militarily in yet another unstable Middle Eastern country. Only this time we're bombing the rebels, not the leadership, as in Libya. It truly appears that American foreign policy in the region has come unhinged. Our political, intelligence, and military communities are out of control. This massive escalation of our involvement in the internal affairs of Muslim nations, thanks above all to George W. Bush, will not end happily. I cannot help but think that this is yet another sign of the "decline and fall" of our once great nation.

Didn't hear that on CNN, now did you? Funny how the phrase "Rogue state" keeps bubbling up through the subconscious.

So this raises the question: would a crowd of thousands of angry US citizens, despite being NON-autorized by the US government, be able to organize and demonstrate in Washinton DC, in a crucial day, let's say election day?

I'm doing a little research here, and so far have determined that the US Marine Corps is approaching 40% minority in its racial makeup whereas none of the other services seem as high.

Interesting point made here --

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2003-01-20-army-race-usat-_x.htm

-- is that very few boogs make frontline combat troops. They all seem to cluster in the rear in admin, transport, support and similar roles.Incompetence in battle? Simple cowardice?

One wonders what will happen when all branches of the US armed forces become ... diverse?This is obviously not happening fast enough for Chairman Zero.

Obama Just Got His Private Army

Section 203 of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 204) is amended to read as follows:

SEC. 203. COMMISSIONED CORPS AND READY RESERVE CORPS.

(a) ESTABLISHMENT–

(1) IN GENERAL.–here shall be in the Service a commissioned Regular Corps and a Ready Reserve Corps for service in time of national emergency.

(2) REQUIREMENT.–All commissioned officers shall be citizens of the United States and shall be appointed without regard to the civil-service laws and compensated without regard to the Classification Act 2 of 1923, as amended.

(3) APPOINTMENT.–Commissioned officers of the Ready Reserve Corps shall be appointed by the President and commissioned officers of the Regular Corps shall be appointed by the President with the advice and consent of the Senate.

(4) ACTIVE DUTY.–Commissioned officers of the Ready Reserve Corps shall at all times be subject to call to active duty by the Surgeon General, including active duty for the purpose of training.

... and all this is in the ubiquitous (you guessed it) Senate revisions to the health care bill.

Obama just got his private army……And no one seems to have noticed.

Amazing. 70 years ago, it would have been called Leibstandarte SS Adolf Hitler and all the sheenies would have poo'ed in their little combinations.

The "Dream Act" rewards citizenship to illegal mexicans after they enlist with the armed forces.This is a way to flood the military with hispanics who could care less about America.A perfect group of armed personel to one day surpress any nationalistic uprisings.A foreign dominated military absent of any national pride.The US military actively recruits minorities. Most MCB are filled with blacks and hispanics. And all the rap music and thuggery that go along with it.

Now we're swapping "alleged attrocities". Good. Uncle Nasty brought up the Serbs and Mladic whose main crime was "fighting back while being a white Christian".

How about the Iranian "green revolution". Do you remember the days when the daily five-minutes-of-hate were directed at Ahmadinejad and not Ghaddafy? That was in 2009.

I remember well that the world got to know ONE dead protestor then. Shot dead by an unknown sniper allegedly in the pay of the evil monster Ahmadinejad. Purely by coincidence this ONE victim happened to be the beautiful young woman "Neda", who looked not even foreign but rather like Miss Italy after a three hour session on the tanning bed. Luckily, as she draws her last breath, a guy with a camera and some skills is nearby to capture the whole thing and load it up on youtube.

Again: I work as a camera operator myself. Filming dead or dying persons and remaining steady while doing it is not easy if you're doing it for the first time. Newbies or amateurs are bound to mess it up.

That being said, what are the chances that a sniper in Theran picks out "Miss Italy", downs her while leaving everybody else on the scene alone, thus allowing a photo/video professional who is already there, camera rolling, to immortalize the proceedings? After which the alleged amateur photographer just so happens to have CNN in Atlanta on the hot-dial, allowing him to inject "miss Italy's" demise into the news cycle.

Math says that chance of such a thing occuring naturally are in the fractions of fractions of a percent. Unless somebody like the seasoned and freedom loving PR professionals of Hill and Knowlton lent a hand at arranging for such a chain of coincidences.

Hill and Knowlton: http://www.prwatch.org/books/tsigfy10.html

In conclusion, I'd urge anybody to think twice before joining in on the five-minutes-of-hate directed at the evil foreign dicatator du jour. It is in fact quite likely that the Ghaddafys, Ahmadinejads and Saddams of this world don't care about us Westerners and want to leave us alone as long as we leave them alone to enjoy their petro-wealth.

Which is fine by me. I think our enemies are closer than the middle east and north Africa. Much closer.

I did some contracting work in several military bases a few years ago.I was surprised at what I saw, how they lived. Blacks driving thru base blasting rap music, hispanic cliques, white trash.We remodeled an Intel building with mostly whites, they seemed to have it together, but the average guys roaming around, I wasn't impressed. In fact, I was dissapointed by what I saw.From what I saw, the military is being dumbed down with the lowest we have to offer here in the states.But the Intel guys and some others I met outside of the normal ranks were above average in commonsence and dedication.But they were far and few between amonst the majority.

The trend in the US military is for front-line combat personnale, air-force, elite units and high tech weapons specialists to be white. For the rest - the kind of people who'll be used to beat YT down - the ratio is swinging rapidly towards minority.

I believe the above is not uncommon in the more elite US forces,Army,Marines and,of course Seals.Certainly casualty rates in both Iraq and Afghanistan are heavily white.

It must be difficult,on one hand you don't want useless negros fucking up and increasing your chances of getting killed or wounded.On the other, how resentful must you feel knowing that the negroes are behind the lines doing the soft work.And getting the promotions.

...People are often incredulous when they note the current degree of anti-Semitism prevalent in these new arrivals—and they ask the logical question of whether or not this immigration isn't mortally dangerous for the Jewish populations of the countries being culturally enriched. The suggestion being that the Jewish community—by supporting (as they unquestionably have) wholesale Islamic immigration into western countries—is actually engaging in an insane and ultimately self-defeating policy. I do not believe this is the case...

Firstly, there is the “secular” political benefit of destroying ethnic homogeneity of Western states... In order to affect this transformation, one makes use of the materials that are available. Since France is a long swim—even for a Mexican—one turns to France's southern “neighbors” . . . making use of a little, good ole collective guilt over colonialism in the process. Indeed, one can already see this playing off of various parties taking place in Europe – where Jewish, crypto-Jewish, or philo-Semitic politicians like Geert Wilders co-opt nativist movements in a fashion that remains beneficial to Jewish interests, while Leftish Jewish groups join hands with Muslim organizations to condemn European racism...

Secondly, Jews have historically gotten along fairly well with their Semitic cousins. They did well for themselves oppressing the Visigoths in Spain, while acting as agents for their Moorish masters. Sure, there's some bad blood between them right now over the whole Palestinian thing, but that won't last...

If the Jews in Europe are frightened by near-term anti-Semitism, all the better. They're having trouble convincing them to make Aliyah in its absence...

Thirdly, the infusion of Islamic populations—and Islamic fundamentalism as described above—is part of the dysgenic process by which the populace of the Western world will be transformed into a permanently manageable herd. The Germany of 1933 was an unpleasant lesson (as was the Spanish Reconquista and subsequent Inquisition) of precisely what happens when one visits too much abuse on a homogenous and intelligent host population. Point #1 above deals with the whole “homogenous” part. The second part of this, final solution is to reduce the level of intelligence and knowledge of the host population to the point that it is no longer capable of engendering effective resistance. A friend of mine used to refer to this as the “São Paulo Model”. I used to scoff at it. I'm not so sure anymore...

Some might suggest that this is all too conspiratorial. But it doesn't have to be a “conspiracy” in the sense of an entire ethnic group getting together in auntie Ruth's basement to make plans that they put secretly into motion. More likely, it's an organic movement in a common and commonly beneficial direction, of a people united in their perception of self as “the oppressed outsider”. Some might also suggest that the Jewish community might feel unhappy or disappointed by the end product of these machinations. Aren't they happier within a French France or an English England than they will be in these countries, once the demographic time-bombs they've helped build explode? Maybe. But one of the greatest failures of Western man has been his ridiculous tendency to project his sentiments and sensibilities on others. The idea that the Negro (or the Japanese, or the Indian, and so forth) is just like him—but in a different, physical wrapper—is pathetic and fundamentally wrong. Is it not logical, in fact, that a people who are themselves products of thousands of years of history in crowded, chaotic, multi-ethnic cities would be more at home in such an environment than in the quiet, orderly, homogenous, “boring” communities that we Europeans find most comforting?

Uncle Nasty, could you contact me @ robalbion@live.co.uk. Set up a hotmail account I'm not interested in who you are but you critique. Your analysis etc is always cutting and your wording attractive..maybe we can do more than just blog/post. I've asked other fellas who are similar to yourself. As it stands we bitch amongst ourselves, which achieves f**k all, we need to do more in my opinion,I have some ideas and am part of group who are more than game for some guerilla marketing.Rob

Good post! The PC elite don't mind stuffing a few darkies/minorities into a corporation to make up the "diversity" quota no matter how incompetent these stooges are. Perception is everything.

HOWEVER: when the rubber hits the road such as needing elite soldiers to fight a nasty foe, only the best will do - WHITES.

That's why I was not surprised to see only white soldiers in the link you provided. Makes sense.

OT

@Uncle Nasty

Loved your post concerning Henry Hill's reminiscing about some wiseguys chucking a bag snatching pinkfooted-velcro-crested-wallet-snatcher off the roof of a 5 story building with such enthusiasm that he landed on the opposite sidewalk.

Hell I wish we would do the same where I live.

I'll take this opportunity to thank you for the information and amusement you bring to this blog.

Franz: A friend of mine who is a freelance TV cameraman said the same thing about this Iranian girl. Strange that you raise the point. He said, only in passing, I add, that it looked more like a film than ad hoc amateur footage.

By the way, he said the same thing about the first plane hitting the WTC on 9/11. He said that this was too still and professional for it to be an ad hoc amateur thing.

I haven't read through all the comments yet. I'll get around to it later. In the meantime, these are all the possibilities I could think of. Take them with a grain of salt.

1 They want oil. When it comes to the middle east, oil is always a factor. But it might not be as simple as just taking it. As others have suggested Qhadafy wasn't playing nice with the western oil companies. Perhaps they just want a regime that will give the west better terms.

2 They want war. This could either mean fighting the war personally. Or it could mean destabilizing the region and letting them fight amongst themselves.

3 They don't want war. Perhaps overthrowing a couple of regimes quickly can keep the situation contained and prevent a larger war throughout the region.

4 They don't like Ghadafy. As others have said he used to be a real bastard but he's been a good boy lately. Although he was recently playing games with black migrants. People think he was helping the west but that's not the case. He was charging the west "protection" money. The blacks wouldn't even be in Libya if he hadn't let them in as part of his blackmail scheme. Without him the Libyans would kick them out pronto and the problem would be gone.

5 They can't stop the revolutions so decided to get out in front of them. At least that way they might have some influence in the outcome.

6 I've wondered if this weren't part of a larger strategy. Otherwise, you wouldn't see so many different countries signing off so quickly. I've also wondered if this weren't the continuation of a strategy that began with Iraq. Perhaps this is part of a strategy to "reshuffle the deck"?

9 I'm very surprised that we are helping revolutionaries dominated by the moslem brotherhood overthrow the secular dictators keeping them in line. Isn't that pretty much what we did to the Shah of Iran? That didn't turn out very well.

10 Maybe there are other things going on in the region that is forcing us to act. A renewed cold war with Russia, China, radical moslems or someone else???

11 When you have so much unrest in so many places and other countries get involved its hard to tell whether they're trying to fan the flames or put them out.

But it doesn't have to be a “conspiracy” in the sense of an entire ethnic group getting together in auntie Ruth's basement to make plans that they put secretly into motion.

More likely, it's an organic movement in a common and commonly beneficial direction, of a people united in their perception of self as “the oppressed outsider”.

Some might also suggest that the Jewish community might feel unhappy or disappointed by the end product of these machinations. Aren't they happier within a French France or an English England than they will be in these countries, once the demographic time-bombs they've helped build explode?

Firstly, I think the Hebrews regard their semitic cousins as inferiors. After all they've been manipulating them for centuries -- just like us. I think they regard arabs as pit bulls ... dangerous and unpredictable but unintelligent. Useful if trained and aimed.

Secondly, regarding first world sophistication and culture and the desire to live there. European culture means nothing to them ... they are utterly bereft of taste, subtlety and refinement. You can take the jew out of the shtetl but ...

anon says "They don't like Ghadafy. As others have said he used to be a real bastard but he's been a good boy lately. Although he was recently playing games with black migrants. People think he was helping the west but that's not the case. He was charging the west "protection" money. The blacks wouldn't even be in Libya if he hadn't let them in as part of his blackmail scheme. Without him the Libyans would kick them out pronto and the problem would be gone."

This is a new slant, and if true, would result in my losing some of my Euro-scepticism.

Nemesis The video searched for had the guy asking why all shots had lovely clear shots of the two towers. That one was just put up to show thta none of the shots used by the media had that building in them because they were all taken from a different part of New York.

The truism that “creative people” tend to manifest the “values”—tolerance and liberalism, for two—of this society’s masters is as uninformative as every other truism (“a proposition that states nothing beyond what is implied by any of its terms”).

Unsurprisingly, the people who have successfully peddled this bill of goods, even to some TOO commenters, fail to reveal that the definers of creativity are the same people that run the communication, information, and entertainment industries and much else besides.

Don't know if I mentioned this, but, if I may piss off the Monarchists among us, Lizzie the Deuce (or would that be "Il Deuce?) is very much a Bilderberger.

Do you think she might persuade the High and the Mighty among them to refund a couple of quid to pay off the royal wedding expenses?

A quote from the article:-

Bilderberg 2011: All aboard the Bilderbus

As the Bilderberg conference heads towards Switzerland there's still time to book your seat on a minibus to St Moritz ...

As Europe groans, and austerity bites, as defaulting looms, and once proud nations fall to their knees in debt, there's only one annual conference of bankers and industrialists that can step in and save us all…

Bilderberg!

Next week, in Switzerland, Henry Kissinger and his brave band of corporate CEOs, high-wealth individuals and heavyweight thinktankers will lock arms with Queen Beatrix of the Netherlands and David Rockefeller, and stand their ground against the economic contagion.

The last thing a bunch of bank bosses and multinational executives wants is for the nation-states of Europe to collapse, allowing their assets to be bought up on the cheap. Right?

Once again, you know who they are, you know what they look like and you know where they live.

For anyone naive enough to think that the so-called great leaders should be rewarded by having honours and laurels showed upon them, they should read Kissinger's history. A public breaking on the wheel would be his finest hour.

Fake Revolutions: The debate is over; the revolutions are fake, the people behind them illegitimate.

This is worth a look ...

http://tiny.cc/bbxag

The degenerate, profiteering liars that populate the Serbian based "CANVAS" organization maintain that while the US government had initially funded them as they overthrew the government of Serbia in 2000, currently the US government does not fund them - that they are privately funded.

Unfortunately for these meddling interlopers, the US government itself is "privately owned" by many of the people who fund the organizations they claim as partners.

These partners include:

Albert Einstein Institution (foundation-funded including the corporate-lined Acra Foundation) United States Institute for Peace (USIP) (funded through Congress) Freedom House (Neo-Con infested) International Republican Institute (IRI) (headed by warmonger John McCain) New Tactics (Ford Foundation-funded, Soros-funded) Humanity in Action (Ford Foundation-funded, US State Department-funded)

The organization is obviously sensitive about who it is seen dealing with, partnering with, and receiving money from. Knowledge of its true nature and purpose has systematically been lied about from its very inception.

Foreign Policy reported that "Like the entire opposition to Milosevic, Otpor [now known as CANVAS] took money from the U.S. government, and lied about it.

Since Watergate, Congress has held just 12 senior U.S. government officials in contempt for failure to produce subpoenaed documents. On Monday, that process begins again.

A hearing in the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee is laying the groundwork to compel U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder and the head of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives to turn over documents related to "Operation Fast and Furious," a secret Obama administration program that put thousands of guns into the hands of Mexican drug cartels.

Fast and Furious aimed to track gun sales to Mexico, allegedly, say critics of the program, to build up evidence to publicly blame cartel violence on U.S. gun store owners and lax American gun laws.

If you've got a few, hide one or two. If you haven't got one ... get one.

Mead says that big government liberalism has gone from being the Great White Hope, to the Great White Elephant (i.e. increasingly dysfunctional), to the Great White Shark (i.e. a force of tyranny and destruction). He concludes his close-to-apocalyptic article thus:

We cannot throw away the hopes with which we have been entrusted in a futile effort to sustain insupportable programs under the shadow of bankruptcy and collapse.

We are approaching the time when the false promises can no longer be sustained. There is a little time left.... We can still act to conserve the essential accomplishments of the progressive era while preparing to move beyond it. But only aggressive and accelerating reform can make that happen. It needs to begin soon. The money is running out.

The American government must not jump the shark.

I think the "Must" mentioned above is wishful thinking. It's happened and is happening now.

This particulat shark is in the process of turning and getting a grip on its libtard riders. Of course, they have no idea this is happening. Until they feel the concave teeth gripping their skinny thighs!

dear Savant and great uncle Nasty, i would like to get together with both of you for a wild hot tube interlude perhaps on Oconnell street naked at midday and we can ridicule the niggers and muslims who wander by and gawk, as the govt. refuses to act on the lawlessness of these tribes why should they bother our love fest de Amour.

A slightly off-topic post, Savant for which I beg your forgiveness. This one has particular resonance for me.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winds_of_Change

I was too young in 1960's South Africa to grasp the significance of Harold MacMillan's "Wind of Change" speech, wherein he basically told all the colonies that they had outlived their usefulness, and that he and the UK were throwing them to the wolves.

So ... it is with a certain sour satisfaction that I read the following:-

http://wiganpatriot.blogspot.com/

Britain can do 'nothing' to prevent Argentina retaking Falkland Islands

Admiral Sir John "Sandy" Woodward also said that America now had little interest in supporting Britain in any conflict as a stable Argentina was more important to the State Department.

In a letter to The Daily Telegraph, Adml Woodward said Washington was pushing for negotiations over sovereignty and "significantly the islands are already being called the Malvinas by the US".

With the end of the Cold War and emergence of Asian powers Nato and Britain were not as important to Washington which in 1982 played a significant part in providing satellite intelligence and missiles to British forces.

"We can no longer rely on the Pentagon to support us in helping the islanders in their wish to remain essentially British sovereign territory," he wrote.

If as is likely significant oil reserves are found around the islands then pressure from Argentina will be immense to share in the riches.

President Barack Obama's administration also made clear in early 2010 that it would endorse calls for talks over the islands when it adopted the Organisation of American States useage of Malvinas instead of Falklands.

Welcome to our world, boys. Hope you enjoy the view from under the bus.

Is anonymous of 14 June 2011 22:02 a luscious young nubile? If not, I'm afraid I cannot accommodate you as three ugly old buggers in a hot tub would be arrested in thirty seconds flat. My mother warned me about such activities.

Damn it ... I'd arrest us.

Cheers,Uncle Nasty

PS looking back on what I have written, I realise the total wrongheadedness of what I have said.

This is 2011. The bluecoats would rather be publicly buttraped by Queen Elizabeth's Corgis than arrest three old queens.

Chinese state owned companies have had to withdraw 30,000 employees from the Libyan oil fields. Ownership, it seems, has now been granted to the “rebels.” Similar activities, though hidden from the view of the masses, are occuring all over the world. How long before the Chinese, the Russians and others take a real stand – a military stand?

Please tattoo this link on your forehead, so that when you wash your face you will remember it:-

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J6YRdFYDVEQ

As to immigration in Europe, see this video where a Jewess Barbara Lerner Spectre, who runs a government-funded Jewish study group in Sweden, makes the following remarkable statement:

Quote:

“I think there is a resurgence of anti-Semitism because at this point in time Europe has not yet learned how to be multicultural. And I think we [the Jews] are going to be part of the throes of that transformation, which must take place. Europe is not going to be the monolithic societies they once were in the last century. Jews are going to be at the centre of that. It’s a huge transformation for Europe to make. They are now going into a multicultural mode and Jews will be resented because of our leading role.”

What is contained herein is but a synopsis and partial review of the verbatim text of an actual book first published in the USA back in early 1941 when America was still a neutral country. That book, Germany Must Perish! was written by a Jewish writer by the name of Theodore N. Kaufman. Its exact proposals are those contained herein.

It is assumed that the reader will already be fully cognizant of the Zionist agenda for global governance that is a given in today’s political reality, especially within the alternative media and on the Internet where Zionist “hate” laws are still not fully in place to restrict the natural flow of ideas and opinions that proceed from historical research and experience.

In 1941 Kaufman’s book was a brilliant piece of Zionist Jew propaganda designed to stir up anti-German hatred in America. Some say that it formed the basis of the infamous “Morgenthau Plan” that was later signed in Quebec, Canada by President Roosevelt and Prime Minister Churchill; one designed to dismember Germany after its defeat and reduce it to the status of “a goat pasture.” It was probably remains to this day the foremost example of hate literature ever to have been published and dispensed to the general public.

As the reader will surmise from viewing the image of the back page of Kaufman’s book some of America’s most prestigious newspapers and magazines were in full support of the objectives set down in this classic book of Jewish hate literature. Again, the reader is cautioned to bear in mind that I have changed the word “Nazi” to “Jew” in the quote from the Philadelphia Record as I have changed all the other words “German” and “Nazi” to “Jew” and “Zionist,” etc.

“I think there is a resurgence of anti-Semitism because at this point in time Europe has not yet learned how to be multicultural.

Europe has no problem with being multi-cultural. It is the unappreciative people brought in to make it multi-cultural that has it as Paris, Marseilles, Rotterdam, London and too many other places have proved.

"He [a federal agent] had his knee on my back and I had no idea why they were there." - Anthony Wright, victim of a Dept. of Education SWAT team raid.

For example, it was heavily armed agents from one such OIG office, working under the auspices of the Department of Education, who forced their way into the home of a California man, handcuffed him, and placed his three children (ages 3, 7, and 11) in a squad car while they conducted a search of his home. This federal SWAT team raid, which is essentially what it was, on the home of Anthony Wright on Tuesday, June 7, 2011, was allegedly intended to ferret out information on Wright’s estranged wife, Michelle, who no longer lives with him and who was suspected of financial aid fraud (early news reports characterized the purpose of the raid as being over Michelle’s delinquent student loans). According to Wright, he was awakened at 6 am by the sound of agents battering down his door and, upon descending the stairs, was immediately subdued by police. One neighbor actually witnessed the team of armed agents surround the house and, after forcing entry, they "dragged [Wright] out in his boxer shorts, threw him to the ground and handcuffed him."

A not-unrelated quote:-

"And how we burned in the camps later, thinking: What would things have been like if every Security operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been uncertain whether he would return alive and had to say good-bye to his family?

Or if, during periods of mass arrests, as for example in Leningrad, when they arrested a quarter of the entire city, people had not simply sat there in their lairs, paling with terror at every bang of the downstairs door and at every step on the staircase, but had understood they had nothing left to lose and had boldly set up in the downstairs hall an ambush of half a dozen people with axes, hammers, pokers, or whatever else was at hand? After all, you knew ahead of time that those bluecaps were out at night for no good purpose. And you could be sure ahead of time that you'd be cracking the skull of a cutthroat.

Or what about the Black Maria sitting out there on the street with one lonely chauffeur---what if it had been driven off or its tires spiked? The Organs would very quickly have suffered a shortage of officers and transport and, notwithstanding all of Stalin's thirst, the cursed machine would have ground to a halt!

If... if... We didn't love freedom enough. And even more -- we had no awareness of the real situation.

We spent ourselves in one unrestrained outburst in 1917, and then we hurried to submit. We submitted with pleasure! ... We purely and simply deserved everything that happened afterward."

One would assume (well, I would, anyway) that the Chinese Intelligence services are neither unsophisticated nor unintelligent.

So one has to wonder if they are looking at the paper tiger (the United States, at the moment) or the real one -- the Bilderberger/Rothschild unholy alliance.

The really worrying thing about the chinese, is that we know little or nothing about them, and so, foolishly assume they know little about us. Another cautionary thing is that I am told the Chinks have a five year plan ... as well as a twenty-year, fifty-year and hundred-year plan.

On the other hand we have the jigaboos like Chairman Zero, for whom long term planning is "Whuz fo' suppa, Baby?"

There is something that worries me about the military endeavors of the US, and I've never been able to articulate it.

This man does rather well.

http://www.amconmag.com/blog/siamese-twins-sharing-the-same-brain/

His comment:-

Georgiaboy61, on June 14th, 2011 at 10:06 pm Said:

My late father, a WWII veteran and high-ranking electronics industry executive with a high-level security clearance, once told me that Americans of his generation, because of Second World War, came to see the military as an all-purpose solution to problems utterly unrelated to the military spehere.

In other words, if the miltary is the hammer, everything else begins to look like a nail.

Why is this the case?

Because alone among the great powers of the Second World War, the U.S. did not have war visited upon it – did not experience devastated cities, miles upon miles of ruins, corpses in the streets, starvation, refugees, and all the rest. Spared from the first-hand effects of armed conflict upon its own soil, Americans were free to develop a romanticized view of war.

NATO's Terror Over Tripoli: NATO slowly admits what the Libyan government has said all along.

http://tiny.cc/jklji

June 19, 2011

By Tony Cartalucci - BLN Contributing Writer

The NATO excursion into Libya started with disingenuous humanitarian concerns translated into a no-fly zone, which incrementally transitioned into attacks on Qaddafi's ground forces, targeted assassinations against Qaddafi himself, then talk of destroying civilian infrastructure and a full-out ground invasion. NATO declared mid-May that it would be "increasing the range of targets" it could hit, including "government infrastructure." With a residential area hit and NATO playing dumb over its role in murdering the very civilians it is supposedly protecting, it appears they made good on their promise.

One must wonder if "R2P" holds true, who will round up NATO and send them to the Hague? ICC's failure to act further undermines its already nonexistent legitimacy.

The key to Qaddafi's long reign, his survival and resistance in the face of NATO's relentless attacks is the support he garners from his own people. While the mainstream media preys on the ignorance of its audience, those who took the time to examine the demographics of Libya would realize the current fighting is split along traditional tribal lines where animosity has existed, and in fact been funded and fostered by the West for at least three decades. With NATO incapable of handing their inept terrorist stooges on the ground the country with airstrikes alone, it appears they are attempting the same terroristic "shock and awe" tactics used against Iraq to break the will of the population with overwhelming violence.

They really don't want to give Gaddaffi his cash back, do they?

What better way to keep your creditors off your back than by bombing the shit out of them?

I begin to have the feeling that the Libya adventure could be the undoing of everything -- especially if Gaddaffi has a chance to catch his breath ... and starts to call in some favours from those he cultivated (and bankrolled) back in the seventies and eighties.

Uncle Nasty

PS. Check out this link;

http://landdestroyer.blogspot.com/2011/05/libya-at-any-cost.html.

A quote:-

One such attack by the LIFG, reported by the Washington Post, saw two German anti-terrorism agents gunned down in 1994. Qaddafi's attempt to subsequently issue an INTERPOL arrest warrant against Al Qaeda's Osama Bin Laden, who was supporting the LIFG at the time, was actually thwarted by British MI6. MI6, according to the Washington Post article, had been concurrently supporting the LIFG alongside Al Qaeda and the warrant wasn't issued until 1998.

The very genesis of Al-Qaeda was in the mountains of Afghanistan during the 1980's Soviet invasion. The United States and Saudi Arabia along with the Pakistani Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) assisted the Afghans in their fight against the Soviet war machine. It was during this time that many of today's Libyan rebels were first brought into America's budding "Islamic" foreign legion, also known as Al-Qaeda. These fighters would go back to Libya after the Soviets were expelled, and go on to support US and British efforts to remove Libyan leader Muammar Qaddafi from power.

For nearly 3 decades the US and British provided these Libyan fighters with weapons and support in their bid to oust the nationalistic Qaddafi. The Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG) in particular, not only received aid and assistance from the West, but also from Osama Bin Laden's Al-Qaeda "legionaries." LIFG leader Noman Benotman literally stood face-to-face with Bin Laden, as he and his fighters trained and prepared for operations against Qaddafi with Al Qaeda's assistance.